2017 QCCQ 8973, 2017 QCCQ 8973

Protection de la jeunesse — 173217 2017 QCCQ 8973 COURT OF QUEBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF [...] LOCALITY OF [...] « Youth Court Division » N°: 525-41-029715-158 Date: April 27, 2017 PRESIDED BY: THE HONOURABLE TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. In the case of: X Born on [...], 2005 [Social Worker 1] , duly authorized by the Director of Youth Protection A Youth and Family Centres Applicant -and- A , the mother -and- B , the father The parents JUDGMENT

Section 95- 95.1 of the Youth Protection Act (L.R.Q., C. P-34.1 ) WARNING: The Youth Protection Act forbids the publishing or broadcasting of information allowing for a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Any person who contravenes this provision commits an offence and is liable to a fine (sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] JD2620 The Court hereby confirms and provides written reasons for a decision rendered verbally at the hearing of April 27, 2017, in accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act [1] . [ 2 ] The Court was presented with a Motion for revision of an order rendered by the undersigned, on December 12, 2016, whereby the now twelve year-old child, X , was entrusted to the care of his mother, with aid, counsel and assistance for a period of one year. [ 3 ] The facts alleged in support of the Motion for revision dated January 13, 2017, are as follows: 3.1. the child’s behavior has deteriorated since his return home; 3.2. the child is verbally and physically aggressive with the mother; 3.3. the child was expelled from the Jewish Day Treatment program due to the child’s defiance, tardiness and parents’ lack of commitment to the program; 3.4. the mother is overwhelmed by the child’s behavior; 3.5. the father is not in a position to assume the care of the child; 3.6. the parents are requesting placement of the child (reproduced with errors and/or omissions). [ 4 ] In light of the foregoing, the Director recommends that the child remain entrusted to a rehabilitation center, with aid, counsel and assistance, as well as additional corrective measures, for a period of one year. [ 5 ] The parents, who both chose to proceed without the assistance of legal counsel, admitted most of the alleged facts and consented to the proposed measures. [ 6 ] Me Shapiro Knight, who represented the child, also admitted the alleged facts and approved of the measures proposed by the Director of Youth Protection.

[ 7 ] The Director filed Exhibits D-8 and D-9 as evidence: D-8: Court report, prepared by [Social Worker 1], dated February 15, 2017; D-9: En liasse: Parental capacity assessment, written by Reida Real Reyes, dated March 13, 2017 and Curriculum Vitae of Reida Real Reyes, psychologist (filed under 292 C.C.P.). [ 8 ] In

summary, the parties admit that the child’s placement in a rehabilitation centre is necessary as neither parent is capable of caring for the child on a daily basis. [ 9 ] The child’s reintegration to his mother’s care was short-lived despite numerous services to support the family: This worker feels that the family made an effort at reintegration, but unfortunately could not overcome X’s difficulty accepting mother’s parental authority and acting out his anger and defiance.

This situation led back into residential placement despite external measures being put in place such as services from the undersigned worker; a dedicated Homeward Bound worker, Mr. Keon Dann; a therapeutic school placement Day Treatment Program at the Jewish General Hospital which had started prior to integration home; continued weekly art therapy with Ms. Marilyn St. Pierre. [2] [ 10 ] Many examples of the child’s defiant and oppositional behavior are described in the Court report [3] . [ 11 ] Both parents are clearly concerned about the child’s welfare.

The father suggests that he could benefit from a psychiatric assessment, more particularly given a (biological) family history of schizophrenia. [ 12 ] The father also disclosed that he himself was recently diagnosed with autism which may explain some of the difficulties that have impacted his ability to parent the child as well as his relationship with the mother. [ 13 ] His visits with his son are however reportedly positive and encouraged. [ 14 ] The mother also recently underwent a parental capacity assessment which confirmed problems in the parent-child relationship but also revealed challenges affecting the mother’s cognitive abilities which may also adversely affect her parenting skills. [ 15 ] Regarding the bond between X and his mother, the following was observed: In conclusion, Ms.

A and X showed a weak attachment. X seems to take a parenting role. Mother did not ask him how he was and did not show interest on how his day went. There seems to be a utilitarian relationship where mother is detached from child but she is there because she has to. The child seems (sic) making attempts to be patient and connect with his mother by focusing on the task. During the goodbye, she asks for a hug. The child hugs her looking away from her and separating with ease. Their attachment style seemed avoidant.

He seems to have learnt that he cannot count on his mother to provide for structure so he takes care of it himself, and avoids to ask. [4] [ 16 ] As for the mother’s own situation, the results are worrisome: Ms. A’s Life Stress score was significant indicating an elevated amount of stress experienced outside the parent-child relationship which requires immediate intervention. [5] Furthermore: Even though Ms.

A did not allow the evaluation of her cognitive performance through a standardized test, there is concern for some evidence of modest cognitive decline in some cognitive domains such as complex attention, executive function, and learning and memory which suggest the possibility of a Mild Neurocognitive Disorder (NCD, DSM-5). This hypothesis should be evaluated and confirmed by a neuropsychologist once Ms. A changes her mind and consents to further evaluation.

These cognitive deficits do not seem to interfere with her capacity for independence in everyday activities, except to hypothesize that they could interfere with her ability to work and explain why she is not working at this time in her life. Apathy, sleep disturbance, and agitation are common in mild NCD . Apathy is typically characterized by diminished motivation and reduced goal-directed behavior accompanied by decreased emotional responsiveness. Similarly, history taking about the presence of Alzheimer’s of Parkinson’s disease in her family history could clarify the etiology of Ms.

A’s present symptoms [6] (emphasis added). [ 17 ] The mother is strongly encouraged to seek medical attention to benefit from treatment for any underlying medical condition from which she may be suffering, if necessary. [ 18 ] She is also encouraged to seek therapy, as recommended in the assessment: • CBT treatment for Ms.

A to help her cope with some self-esteem issues due to experience of domestic violence, symptoms of depression, as well as stress management which could help her with somatic complaints which she links to her car accident two years ago. [7] [ 19 ] Under the circumstances, given the evidence and the consent expressed by each of the parties, the Court is satisfied that the motion is well-founded and that the recommendations are in the child's interest. THEREFORE, THE COURT: [ 20 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 21 ] DECLARES that the security and development of the child, X , remain in danger under the Youth Protection Act ;

AS FOR THE MEASURES, THE COURT DEEMS IT TO BE IN THE CHILD'S INTEREST TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: [ 22 ] ORDERS that the child be entrusted to a rehabilitation center with a possible reintegration to his mother’s care in eight months, if the situation allows; [ 23 ] ORDERS that the parents follow the recommendations from the child’s psychiatric assessment, more particularly ensure that he benefit from individual therapy TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE that he is seeing a psychologist once a week; [ 24 ] ORDERS that he continue to do so for as long as necessary; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the child benefit from a psychiatric assessment as requested by the family (more particularly regarding concerns related to schizophrenia); [ 26 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the mother follow the recommendations from the parental capacity assessment, more particularly that she benefit from a neuropsychological assessment, as soon as possible, as well as from cognitive behavioral therapy; [ 27 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the parents seek therapeutic and supportive services in the community; [ 28 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the child and his mother benefit from joint counselling, as soon as possible; [ 29 ] STRONGLY RECOMMENDS that the child participate in extra-curricular activities, especially team sports and summer camp; [ 30 ] ORDERS that a person working for A Youth and Family Centres provide aid, counsel and assistance to the child and his family; [ 31 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of the child, X , to the Director of Youth Protection A Youth and Family Centres, who shall then see that the measures are carried out; [ 32 ] ORDERS the execution of the present judgment by any peace officer, if deemed necessary; [ 33 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year.

TAYA DI PIETRO, Q.C.J. Me Myriam De Blois Attorney for the Director of Youth Protection Me Judith Ann Shapiro Knight Attorney for the child TD/vl